Subject: Â…hmmm.
Author:
Posted on: 2015-07-25 17:37:00 UTC
Having seen The Hobbit, or enough of it to know better, I would like to formally retract my previous defense of Peter Jackson before this falls off the edge of the page.
(Also, was that really that long ago? Good grief.)
Have you ever wondered what some of our esteemed oldbies were doing when the Board was young(er)? What they were talking about? Well, I am here to answer some of those questions.
I was peeking through the PPC Board archives when I noticed a few spots were pulled from the Wayback Machine. Curious, I decided to see what the Wayback Machine had to show. Strap in kids, because we are going back!
You know when the Hobbit movies came out? Do you ever wonder how the original, near LoTR exclusive Board respond to the announcement? Something like this: http://web.archive.org/web/20071221014046/http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=199610;article=160919;title=PPC%20Posting%20Board
This was in 2007, five years before An Unexpected Journey came out. This was a Big Announcement. Look how few people (relatively) responded to the post. Does it fascinate you? It does me.
How about PPC based news, like a mission release? One of the earliest posts the Wayback can reach is the release of CRASHING DOWN, chapter 5 by our beloved Huinesoron: http://web.archive.org/web/20071221012849/http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=199610;article=160776;title=PPC%20Posting%20Board
Here is something for the archives, if somebody else has not done it. We semi-recently amended our Constitution, and have amended it in the past. Here, in my possession, is a copy of the PPC constitution from Way Back When. http://web.archive.org/web/20071209034605/http://oddlots.digitalspace.net/PPC/boardconstitution.html
I know, I'm not exactly Nic Cage, but I found it interesting.
And now, to end on a high note, the greatest thing to come from the PPC. What follows is C*l*br**n related, so, you know. NSFW.
December 10, 2007, Board user Laburnum read <a href="http://smartbitchestrashybooks.com/reviews/redhawkswomanbykarenkay/">this book review, which made an interpretive dance out of a trashy romance novel. Laburnum asked the Board if they could turn other things into interpretive dance, such as badfic. Just a little while later, Board user BattleHamster answered the call. People of the Board, I give you: C***b***n: The Interpretive Dance
http://web.archive.org/web/20071221012603/http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=199610;article=160743;title=PPC%20Posting%20Board"
Having seen The Hobbit, or enough of it to know better, I would like to formally retract my previous defense of Peter Jackson before this falls off the edge of the page.
(Also, was that really that long ago? Good grief.)
That's not the word I'd use...
I have to wonder where I was for the Hobbit announcement. December 18th... might've been out of action for Christmas, I suppose. Still, though, it seems unusual.
As for the Interpretive Dance... :D Welcome to the PPC!
hS
(PS: I should note for my own sake that the original, Saphie-penned Constitution is linked from the Wiki page, and can be found here. So it is archived, I promise...!)
(PPS: Given what I'm posting later today, this is a VERY apt thread. Thanks for it! The past makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.)
Simply Baron, if one is feeling humble?
I found it so fascinating how the LoTR movies, which I see as classic cinema, and do an annual viewing of all three extended editions, were spoke of as absolute dreck that ruined the books with broken logic. Not that I am saying they weren't different from the books, nor that there were not changes that were made that should not have, but it was like the trilogy was Eragon or Percy Jackson or something. (Yes, I know. The Percy Jackson movies came out later. My point still stands.) Of course, knowing how the Hobbit movies went... Yeah, maybe there was some cause for hesitation.
It may well be the original wording, but I brought the original page! So ha! Mine's better. :p
(PS: Look how small the header was back then! Just, "Read the constitution, please!" Not much else. How things have changed.)
'Ooh, my name's Faramir, I'm going to abduct the Ringbearer and drop him right in front of a Ringwraith and somehow this won't get back to Sauron!'
'Ooh, my name's Sam, I've followed Frodo all this way, but now Gollum's framed me for stealing food I'm just going to give up and go home!'
'Ooh, my name's Theoden, I'm going to whine that Gondor didn't save me from an army they had no way of knowing was even there!'
Seriously. Seriously.
And then there's the gratiutous changes to things that, while not turning into bad logic, were far far better in the book. Frodo becomes a drooling idiot at the Ford of Bruinen instead of defying the Nazgul. Denethor becomes such a caricature that Gandalf whacks him about the head and he eventually runs over the edge of the city screaming - that's a much worse character distortion than any badfic's ever produced! Aragorn doesn't rally the people of southern Gondor to aid their capital behind their future king - no, he just leads an army of neon-green ghosts. Leadership!
And don't even mention the Scouring of the Shire. Oh, wait - they didn't. They just decided that the bit Tolkien wrote to be the point of the whole story was 'too depressing', and cut the whole thing out.
~
(Back to the present) I... still agree with all that. ^_^ I'd just say it with less italics nowadays.
hS
(PS: I'd love to have a simple header on the Board again. Problem is, with the loss of both Oddlots and Misssandman.com, we don't have a homepage other than the Wiki; the header is having to do double-duty.)
Is to make the purists sulk. You know that. =]
And if it was, for instance, the Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell adaptation, I could see the reason for the changes. They did some stuff to tighten up the storyline to fit it into seven hours, and some to shift the focus onto the women more. So they monkeyed with the timeline, for instance, to give Emma Pole some interactions with the Arabella Strange plotline. In the book, they have, what, one on-page meeting?
But LotR-M changed things just for the heck of it. Why make Frodo useless at the ford? It wasn't to establish Arwen's character as Super Awesome for later use - they didn't use the super-awesome part. Were they trying to make Frodo look weaker so his perseverance later was more impressive? Did they just have some spare fake drool on hand? Who knows! I doubt PJ&co do.
As for Faramir: it's not even so much the 'I'll abduct him', though the fact that not going after the Ring pretty much defined his entire character makes that hurt a lot (and the fact that they used his actual line to justify the abduction is just terrible). It's the fact that, in the interests of 'adding tension', they put a Ringwraith in front of Frodo. You know, the ones who've been established time and time again as sensing the Ring whenever it's nearby? And, what, the Nazgul in question just... didn't feel like reporting it? 'Eh, I'm sure the boss already knows. Whatevs.'
There's ticking off the purists, and there's gratuitous violence to plot, character, and common sense. Guess which category LotR-M falls into.
Hint: you don't have to guess.
hS
You may, for instance, recall that one of the Nine was foiled by the "thrown object in the undergrowth" trick from every PoW movie ever. Sensing the Ring or not, these are the actions of someone who is, er... let's call them "differently bright". I would not put it past the relevant Nazgul to have completely forgotten about it, or be distracted by someone jangling a set of keys over its face or an interesting blob of Fell Beast snot. They have that in common with evil minions everywhere - thick as two short planks but dangerous in a fight unless you're wearing your Plot Armour.
The Ringwraith in question was distracted from being able to catch the Ringbearer - not from knowing the Ring was in the general area. They knew it was somewhere in the Shire, just not exactly where. But it shouldn't have been in Osgiliath! By the movie's own timeline, Sauron was under the impression that Saruman had captured the halfling with the Ring at this point. Feeling it practically on the border of Mordor should've rung alarm bells from Dol Guldur to deepest Rhun.
But it didn't, because PJ is bad at consequences. And how exactly are you claiming 'the villains are as thick as two short planks' as not being a mark of bad filmmaking?
hS
I think whenever I watch that scene I'm still stewing over Faramir, so that might be why.
Also (and I hate to break into the discussion), hS, which character distortion was worse for you-- Faramir's or Denethor's? My dad, who introduced me to LotR, is angrier about Faramir, but I get a lot more fired up about Denethor. With Faramir, at least, PJ gave a reason: the middle film need an emotional climax. Denethor's... everything didn't seem to have a reason to me. I mean, the guy wore armor everywhere! He was tragic and brave and wise and solemn and they ruined him! Gah! Why would they even change him? His original character was awesome!
*sighs deeply*
I think your italics infected me...
Filmamir (term (c) Philosopher at Large) was a travesty: his one major character point was completely flipped, and then he got turned into a complete pushover for RotK-M ('I shall go and commit suicide-by-orc so my daddy will love me'). It's really hard to see what Eowyn saw in him.
But Denethor... well, what you said! They turned him into a mini-villain. From the moment we first saw him, he was clearly and deeply evil. And I don't know why. I don't know why they thought 'Denethor stuffs his face disgustingly with chicken' was a good cinematic moment. I don't know why they decided that seeing him completely break down was more powerful than seeing him break inside but still try to keep going. I just don't know.
hS